LandLord Sold Garden Which Was Under Tenancy

moneyistooshorttomention

...and just as well to gather all evidence and be methodical.

I've found more than once (in my personal experience) that that was a good idea.

The vast majority of people don't do that and therefore it's rarely expected of anyone. If you're someone who can say "I have the proof of that...a bit of paper dating back to 1995" for instance then that often gives a head start.

First the "other side" hasn't been expecting it (because most people don't do that) and then, when they get to know you better and realise you probably have/will keep everything and keep it organised...then they often don't even "try it" at whatever-it-was in the first place.

tim123456789

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Basically, from what you say, he's taken you for a mug. You did the garden in all good faith "knowing" it was/is "yours".

Except that he knew it was "his" only for the duration of the fixed term tenancy. It takes many many months to get a mess of a garden looking nice. Any savvy tenant would have realised that he was only going to get limited enjoyment from this effort.

The only solution that T can ultimately "force" here is a reduction in rent, if he insists on access to "his" garden he will just get an eviction notice.

tim

adrihd

from how I understood it, whether the term is fixed or periodic, it doesn't make a difference. Shelter used the phrase 'right of estate' or something like that during the term that the tenancy applies.

adrihd

Is the Title Register the 'lease'? mentioned earlier on the land reg website?

Lokolo

The boundary diagram will show you the property boundary and how much of the garden is within it.

You need to determine whether the part of the garden being sold off, is within that boundary of the property you are renting.

e2000e2000e

My 2pence worth is that going to land registry is a step to far it is what is outlined in the OP's agreement that matters. I'm thinking of a a house I rented that had a detached garage, the deeds would show it as part of the property, but my agreement procluded it as storage for the landlord. Now the OP mentions his agreement refers to a garden, but are the size and location of this garden included in the agreement? If not the LL could claim the garden was only ever the area now provided. I'm not condoning the LL actions, I'm just illustrating the fact that proofing access to the garden in its entireity formed part of the tenancy may be difficult, and releastically the best you can hope for is to negotiate a reduction in rent, which if forced will leave you with an s21 and the first available opportunity.

Land_Registry

The title register will reveal the written word pertaining ot the title/property searched against
The title plan will show the general boundaries
If you have a AST which is of less than 7 years then it will not be registered

How long is your AST for?

cattie

I have to admit that the post made by e2000 makes sense. If you have not been deprived of a garden, & it doesn't sound as if you have if there is still a small area available to be used by all tenants, then you all still have share of a communal garden.

Also, unless your rent is considerably higher than comparable bedsits/studios in the area that don't have gardens, then I don't quite understand what all the fuss is about with the LL deciding to sell a bit of their land when given the opportunity to do so & make a bit of money for herself.

I've lived in houses converted into flats with shared garden & no tenant has ever considered the garden as 'theirs'. It was always thought of as just an added bonus & certainly if a landlord had wanted to sell part of it on, it would never have entered any of our heads to kick up such a fuss about it if we were still being left with a reduced outdoor space to continue to enjoy should we so wish to do so.

You mention your rent is already very low, so I wouldn't hold my breath regarding getting a reduction in rent. Rather, you probably will get your marching orders at the first opportunity. You say you don't care, but with your finances in such a bad state, why have you even risked your current tenancy I wonder.

Lokolo

e2000e2000e wrote: »

My 2pence worth is that going to land registry is a step to far it is what is outlined in the OP's agreement that matters. I'm thinking of a a house I rented that had a detached garage, the deeds would show it as part of the property, but my agreement procluded it as storage for the landlord. Now the OP mentions his agreement refers to a garden, but are the size and location of this garden included in the agreement? If not the LL could claim the garden was only ever the area now provided. I'm not condoning the LL actions, I'm just illustrating the fact that proofing access to the garden in its entireity formed part of the tenancy may be difficult, and releastically the best you can hope for is to negotiate a reduction in rent, which if forced will leave you with an s21 and the first available opportunity.

Agreed if it wasn't in the AST, but the OP says in the first post, points 2 and 3, that the garden is there's in the agreement.

The reason someone said about land registry was to make sure the garden hadn't been split up and the OP made an error thinking that the whole garden was theirs to enjoy, when in fact only half was and the other half wasn't part of the property.

cattie wrote: »

I have to admit that the post made by e2000 makes sense. If you have not been deprived of a garden, & it doesn't sound as if you have if there is still a small area available to be used by all tenants, then you all still have share of a communal garden.

Also, unless your rent is considerably higher than comparable bedsits/studios in the area that don't have gardens, then I don't quite understand what all the fuss is about with the LL deciding to sell a bit of their land when given the opportunity to do so & make a bit of money for herself.

I've lived in houses converted into flats with shared garden & no tenant has ever considered the garden as 'theirs'. It was always thought of as just an added bonus & certainly if a landlord had wanted to sell part of it on, it would never have entered any of our heads to kick up such a fuss about it if we were still being left with a reduced outdoor space to continue to enjoy should we so wish to do so.

You mention your rent is already very low, so I wouldn't hold my breath regarding getting a reduction in rent. Rather, you probably will get your marching orders at the first opportunity. You say you don't care, but with your finances in such a bad state, why have you even risked your current tenancy I wonder.

Not sure I agree with this.

If you had signed an agreement for use of the rooms around the property, then halfway through the landlord said you can't use it all anymore because he is selling it, would that not be wrong?

Yes, if the OP hadn't had it before and nothing was ever said about it then fine, the landlord can do what he wants, but the OP said that the garden is part of their AST.

Prothet_of_Doom

Being practical, how much different is the rent locally for a similar flat, with a shared garden ? Is there one out there, that would suit you ? You could move, and when you give notice to LL and LA point out that you consider they have broken the contract you had.
Or you could renegotiate the rent based on the fact that flats without gardens are SO much cheaper in your area, and remind them that your contract included a garden.
I suspect the Land Lord would move slightly on the price if there really is a difference locally in price, but I suspect selling the garden will have made many years of rent.